Course record GRMN
GRMN 2010
Intermediate German 1
University of Colorado Boulder
392 grades17 professors
Grades: Dates unavailableEvaluations: 2020–2026
Flunk Score38/100
Below average
Paula Emily Marie Wittmann 31 grades · 1 term 3.18GPA
31 letter grades
Compare with the course
Wittmann vs. the course average
A
+10.3
B
−6.2
C
−2.9
D
−1.4
F
+0.2
Difference in percentage points.
8.8% withdrew · 3 of 34 enrolled.
Overall4.77 / 5
43 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.40
Technology4.86
Synthesis4.56
Collaboration4.94
Connection4.50
Contribution4.81
Discussion4.96
Inclusivity4.39
Grading4.96
Reflection4.70
Respect4.94
Creativity4.69
Feedback4.75
Interaction4.89
Challenge4.75
Questions4.89
Ursula Berit Jany 93 grades · 1 term 3.11GPA
93 letter grades
Compare with the course
Jany vs. the course average
A
+0.6
B
+5.7
C
−5.1
D
−2.4
F
+1.2
Difference in percentage points.
4.1% withdrew · 4 of 97 enrolled.
Mari Mccarville 33 grades · 1 term 3.10GPA
33 letter grades
Compare with the course
Mccarville vs. the course average
A
+4.1
B
−4.9
C
+2.4
D
+1.5
F
−3.1
Difference in percentage points.
8.3% withdrew · 3 of 36 enrolled.
Overall4.87 / 5
24 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.40
Technology4.80
Synthesis4.60
Collaboration4.90
Connection4.85
Contribution4.70
Discussion4.95
Inclusivity4.65
Grading5.00
Reflection4.85
Respect4.95
Creativity4.85
Feedback4.90
Interaction4.95
Challenge4.80
Questions5.00
Reed Edward Johnson 49 grades · 1 term 3.08GPA
49 letter grades
Compare with the course
Johnson vs. the course average
A
+3.6
B
−4.6
C
−1.5
D
+1.5
F
+1.0
Difference in percentage points.
5.8% withdrew · 3 of 52 enrolled.
Overall4.70 / 5
27 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.30
Technology4.64
Synthesis4.58
Collaboration4.32
Connection4.38
Contribution4.64
Discussion4.94
Inclusivity4.68
Grading4.78
Reflection4.70
Respect5.00
Creativity4.79
Feedback4.73
Interaction4.98
Challenge4.51
Questions4.96
Stefan Daniel Bongers 57 grades · 1 term 3.08GPA
57 letter grades
Compare with the course
Bongers vs. the course average
A
+0.8
B
+1.6
C
same
D
−2.8
F
+0.4
Difference in percentage points.
0.0% withdrew · 0 of 57 enrolled.
Overall4.45 / 5
42 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.20
Technology4.60
Synthesis4.07
Collaboration4.80
Connection4.37
Contribution4.43
Discussion4.50
Inclusivity4.10
Grading4.40
Reflection4.53
Respect4.47
Creativity4.60
Feedback4.30
Interaction4.60
Challenge4.47
Questions4.53
Petra Sertic 17 grades · 1 term · Limited sample 3.11GPA
17 letter grades · Limited sample
5.6% withdrew · 1 of 18 enrolled.
Overall4.53 / 5
6 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.20
Technology4.30
Synthesis4.20
Collaboration4.50
Connection4.80
Contribution4.70
Discussion4.70
Inclusivity4.50
Grading4.30
Reflection4.50
Respect4.50
Creativity4.80
Feedback4.30
Interaction4.80
Challenge4.70
Questions4.30
Klara Spechtenhauser 22 grades · 1 term · Limited sample 3.00GPA
22 letter grades · Limited sample
8.3% withdrew · 2 of 24 enrolled.
Overall4.74 / 5
12 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.50
Technology4.50
Synthesis4.70
Collaboration4.70
Connection4.30
Contribution4.60
Discussion4.90
Inclusivity4.30
Grading4.80
Reflection4.50
Respect4.80
Creativity4.60
Feedback5.00
Interaction4.80
Challenge4.70
Questions4.60
Pia Claudia Zeller 14 grades · 1 term · Limited sample 2.97GPA
14 letter grades · Limited sample
0.0% withdrew · 0 of 14 enrolled.
Overall4.71 / 5
24 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.03
Technology4.63
Synthesis4.12
Collaboration4.90
Connection4.52
Contribution4.57
Discussion4.81
Inclusivity4.60
Grading4.84
Reflection4.51
Respect4.86
Creativity4.68
Feedback4.56
Interaction4.71
Challenge4.75
Questions4.61
Elisa Nastasia Maiete Riga 15 grades · 1 term · Limited sample 2.94GPA
15 letter grades · Limited sample
6.3% withdrew · 1 of 16 enrolled.
Overall3.95 / 5
7 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence3.40
Technology4.30
Synthesis3.70
Collaboration4.30
Connection4.40
Contribution3.90
Discussion4.30
Inclusivity4.10
Grading3.60
Reflection4.00
Respect4.60
Creativity3.70
Feedback3.60
Interaction4.30
Challenge3.90
Questions4.40
Leilani Kay Spurlock 18 grades · 1 term · Limited sample 2.93GPA
18 letter grades · Limited sample
5.3% withdrew · 1 of 19 enrolled.
Overall4.54 / 5
29 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence3.99
Technology4.92
Synthesis4.27
Collaboration4.66
Connection4.10
Contribution4.62
Discussion4.47
Inclusivity4.21
Grading4.66
Reflection4.73
Respect4.81
Creativity3.84
Feedback4.55
Interaction4.71
Challenge4.43
Questions4.81
Oliver Ozellis 13 grades · 1 term · Limited sample 2.88GPA
13 letter grades · Limited sample
7.1% withdrew · 1 of 14 enrolled.
Overall4.56 / 5
12 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence3.50
Technology4.80
Synthesis4.10
Collaboration4.50
Connection4.40
Contribution4.80
Discussion4.90
Inclusivity4.20
Grading4.60
Reflection4.50
Respect4.90
Creativity4.30
Feedback4.20
Interaction4.80
Challenge4.80
Questions4.70
Julius Konstantin Arnold 17 grades · 1 term · Limited sample 2.82GPA
17 letter grades · Limited sample
5.6% withdrew · 1 of 18 enrolled.
Overall4.87 / 5
18 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.70
Technology4.85
Synthesis4.55
Collaboration4.85
Connection4.90
Contribution4.85
Discussion5.00
Inclusivity4.75
Grading4.85
Reflection4.80
Respect4.85
Creativity4.90
Feedback4.95
Interaction4.95
Challenge4.80
Questions5.00
Erik Ingolf Harald Floeter 13 grades · 1 term · Limited sample 2.47GPA
13 letter grades · Limited sample
7.1% withdrew · 1 of 14 enrolled.
Overall4.66 / 5
9 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.60
Technology4.70
Synthesis4.40
Collaboration4.70
Connection4.60
Contribution4.90
Discussion5.00
Inclusivity4.70
Grading4.80
Reflection4.70
Respect4.80
Creativity4.20
Feedback4.10
Interaction4.80
Challenge4.90
Questions4.90
Berit Jany 1 reported responses 4.57Eval / 5
Overall4.57 / 5
1 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.00
Synthesis4.00
Collaboration5.00
Connection4.00
Contribution4.00
Inclusivity5.00
Reflection5.00
Interaction5.00
Benjamin Kirchoff 17 reported responses 4.30Eval / 5
Overall4.30 / 5
17 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence3.85
Technology4.40
Synthesis4.00
Collaboration4.42
Connection4.16
Contribution4.39
Discussion4.53
Inclusivity4.17
Grading4.38
Reflection4.09
Respect4.58
Creativity3.97
Feedback4.34
Interaction4.59
Challenge4.34
Questions4.58
Constanze Felber 23 reported responses 4.17Eval / 5
Overall4.17 / 5
23 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence3.70
Technology3.70
Synthesis3.85
Collaboration4.65
Connection4.00
Contribution4.25
Discussion4.40
Inclusivity4.35
Grading3.60
Reflection3.55
Respect4.65
Creativity3.95
Feedback4.40
Interaction4.65
Challenge4.10
Questions4.30
Xan Faber 13 reported responses 4.83Eval / 5
Overall4.83 / 5
13 reported responses
Scale 1–5
Critical examination of evidence4.50
Technology4.80
Synthesis4.90
Collaboration4.80
Connection4.70
Contribution4.80
Discussion5.00
Inclusivity4.70
Grading4.80
Reflection4.70
Respect4.80
Creativity4.80
Feedback4.80
Interaction5.00
Challenge5.00
Questions4.80
Find a course or professor
Search helper · Uses this school’s records. Try “compare ECON 101” or a professor’s name.